in aforesaid case cited by you courts below had already taken a view that there is no subsisting tenancy between the appellants and the respondent, hence SC held that we cannot deny the legitimate right of the landlord or his successor to the possession of these premises

2) The Supreme court said the primary issue was whether the son could be deemed a tenant. Once it was found that the respondent was not a tenant, he had no right to challenge the landlord’s ownership as the latter was already armed with a decree of eviction against the original tenant.

3) in your case there is no finding by rent tribunal that deceased was not a tenant .

4) his legal heirs would be deemed tenants

5) you should make the legal representatives parties to suit proceedings and fight case on grounds of personal necessity

1) in case rent Tribunal holds that tenancy has lapsed after death of tenant his legal representative would be regarded as trespasser

2) you have to file civil suit for eviction of trespasser

Since you filed the case you need to implead the legal heirs of deceased and bring the case to an end

Other wise you may not get any relief for ever

If the tenancy stands terminated upon death of tenant then the court will dismiss the case because the original relief was not against the legal heirs.